The Bible Undressed

            I remember when the musical Jesus Christ Superstar first came out (yes, I’m that old!).^[1]  It was a bit controversial among conservative Christians.  I recall asking the pastor of our small Lutheran church about it.  He was not enthusiastic, but he thought it might be a good thing if it got more people to think about Jesus.  Of course today Jesus is indeed a “superstar” as over two billion Christians in the world see him as the Son of God, the Lord, the Savior, or some similar exalted title.  And there are nearly two billion Muslims who see Jesus as a prophet of God.  That’s a lot of people looking up to Jesus in some way!  But what about in his own day? 

Jeff Fenholt in the original 1971 production of Jesus Christ Superstar

            Jesus grew up in the obscure town of Nazareth in the hinterlands of Israel.  Nazareth was so small that archaeologists have not found any public buildings there and no synagogue (despite what the Gospels say).  But eventually he worked his way down to Jerusalem, the hub of the Jewish religion.  Of course, his message did not play well there, and he was crucified soon after.  Now, the book of Acts says that only a few weeks later there was a mass conversion of about 3,000 people (Acts 2:41).  Soon this new religion had grown to so that “the number of the men came to be about five thousand” (Acts 4:4).  Unfortunately, there is no confirmation of a Christian presence this large in Jerusalem at that time outside of the book of Acts.  Still, the religion did grow over time.  When in the year 312 CE the Roman Emperor Constantine converted the religion was still in the minority, but within a hundred years it became the dominant religion in the Empire.  However, this was outside of Israel.  Was Jesus ever a superstar in his homeland of Israel?

            There was a well-known Jewish historian whose life (c. CE 37 – c. 100) and work spans the emergence of the Christian church.  Flavius Josephus was a general of the Jewish forces in the First Jewish–Roman War, before being captured and eventually collaborating with the Romans, which did not set well with other Jews.  His two most important written works were The Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews, the latter being an important extra-Biblical source of history about the Jewish people.  Surely we can look to Josephus for some historical data about Jesus and His movement, right?

            It turns out that we have one passage about Jesus in Josephus’ lengthy history, commonly called the Testimonium Flavianum (i.e., “The testimony of Flavius Josephus”).  The chapter was about events concerning Pilate, whom he calls “the procurator of Judea,” but here is what it says about Jesus: 

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.

Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3

Josephus also makes a separate brief mention of Jesus in connection to the execution of His brother James:

Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he [Ananus] assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned…

Antiquities of the Jews, Book 20, Chapter 9

So, here we have historical evidence of Jesus from a non-Christian source, right?  Well, yes and no.  Most scholars believe that the Testimonium Flavianum is a later Christian insertion or interpolation, perhaps an elaboration of an original brief mention of Jesus as a victim of Pilate.  Since Josephus was a collaborator with the Romans and therefore not looked upon favorably by the Jews his works were mostly preserved by Christians, who had opportunity to tweak its contents.  The passage certainly reads like a Christian testimony, not something an objective Jewish historian would say.  For a summary of why scholars question the passage, Wikipedia has a well-cited article entitled “Josephus on Jesus” which outlines the concerns.[2]  Personally, I think if Josephus actually said those things about Jesus then he would have devoted more space to such a remarkable man.  I mean, the prophets foretold a thousand marvelous things about him yet he merits only a brief mention in a 20-volume work?

            The reference to the execution of Jesus’ brother James may well be authentic, although some scholars question it as well (is there anything scholars don’t question?).  Unfortunately all it tells us is that Jesus had a brother James and that some referred to Jesus as “Christ,” which is consistent with the New Testament, but not very instructive.  It is no more than a slight passing reference to Jesus.

            Josephus also mentioned John the Baptizer, a critically important predecessor and possible mentor of Jesus (although Josephus makes no connection between the two):

Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins, but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when many others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God’s displeasure to him.

Antiquities, Book 18 Chapter 5

This passage about John the Baptizer is generally thought to be authentic, although like most everything else there are scholars who dissent.  The passage differs in some details from the Gospels (like the reason for John’s execution), suggesting it was not inserted by later Christians, but that is not definitive proof of authenticity.

            What I find interesting is that although Christianity later became a huge factor in the Roman Empire Josephus basically ignores the movement in his time.  In fact, he seems more impressed by John’s ministry than that of Jesus.  At the end of the First Century when Josephus was writing the Jesus movement was either still quite small, or it was just small within Israel, so Josephus saw no need to discuss it in his Antiquities of the Jews.  It is not Antiquities of the Christians, after all.  It was John’s preaching that garnered a large following among the Jews as compared to Jesus, at least from Josephus’ perspective.  Note that Josephus says Herod executed John because of his growing influence among the Jews, while he says Jesus was executed by the Gentile procurator Pilate for an unspecified accusation and that “the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”  So, the Christians were still around, but not a significant force, maybe even a dwindling presence in his view.  John was the significant influence among the Jews, not Jesus.

            This is not surprising if you consider John’s message according to Josephus: “[he] commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God.”  This is a message that would appeal to the Jews, as it continues the message preached by the later prophets of the Old Testament.  And it says nothing about Jesus or any other coming Messiah.  Being right with God comes through repentance leading to righteousness, and is symbolized by baptism; there is no innovation of a sacrificial Messiah.  This message of righteous living is consistent with our earliest gospel:

John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Mark 1:4

And Mark has Jesus come and be baptized by John along with everyone else, as if Jesus, too, was human and in need of repentance and forgiveness(!).  It is only after John was arrested that Jesus then took up the mantle of John’s ministry (Mark 1:14), believing that God had called him to then lead the way.  But of course the Christians came to see Jesus as the promised Messiah, not John, so they needed to portray Jesus as the master and John as the disciple rather than the other way around.  So, John’s message is appended to include: “After me one is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to stoop down and untie the thong of his sandals.  I baptized you with water; but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit” (Mark 1:7, 8).  And when Jesus is baptized he hears a voice from Heaven tell him, “You are My beloved Son, in you I am well-pleased.”  So for Josephus John was the superstar in Israel and Jesus a footnote, but for the Christians John was just the opening act and Jesus was the superstar.

            Let me throw out one other related thought.  John seems to have made a bigger impact in Israel than Jesus, but we have only an inkling of John’s teachings preserved in the Gospels.  Or do we?  Some think John may have arisen from the Essene sect in Judea.  The Gospel of Luke says that John was born to a priest who served in the Jerusalem temple.  Either way (or both), he would have been in a better position to be literate and educated in the Scriptures and Jewish tradition; he may have had much more training than Jesus who grew up in rural Nazareth.  Jesus became a disciple of John and was baptized by him, and so Jesus may have learned much of his teaching material from John.  Perhaps many of the teachings we read in the Gospels actually originated with John, not Jesus.  How would we know?    

            I think there may be some clues that some (if not all) of Jesus’ teachings came from John.  John is said to have called the religious elite “a brood of vipers” that should bear good fruit and not rely on the fact that Abraham is their father (Matthew 3:7-9).  Later Jesus says virtually the same thing, including the phrase “brood of vipers” (Matthew 12:33, 34).  In John 8:33-40 we see an elaboration by Jesus of John’s teaching that the Jews cannot rely on having Abraham as their father.  John used the imagery of God gathering up “the wheat” and burning “the chaff” (Matthew 3:12), which Jesus then uses in Matthew 13:24-30.  Consider that baptism became the rite of entrance to the Christian community in the early church.  John is portrayed as teaching people to be baptized, not Jesus, who never teaches about baptism (with the possible exception of John 3:5 in the last gospel written).  Perhaps we give Jesus too much credit for his teachings and not enough to John.[3]  Perhaps John was the great teacher and Jesus was riding his coattails? 

            So, what do we learn from Josephus about Jesus?  Not much.  But maybe his writings are a clue that John the Baptizer was the superstar in Israel, not Jesus, who became a hit only among the Gentiles after His elevation to divine Son of God and amazing stories accompanied that exaltation.  The Jews did not need a crucified Jesus; they were the Promised People who had the Law and the Prophets.  The Gentiles, on the other hand, were ready for a miracle-working divine Son of God who, according to the evangelists, offered real change in their earthly lives and then eternal life, as compared to the petty, human-like and ineffective gods of the Greco-Roman world.  And the rest is history, as they say, and Jesus became a superstar.

---

[1] Jesus Christ Superstar, music by Andrew Lloyd Webber, lyrics by Tim Rice, 1971.

[2] In an article about Josephus on the blog of scholar James Tabor he actually points readers to this Wikipedia article, so he seems to think it is worthwhile. 

[3] The Mandaeans are a religious group that view John the Baptist as the final and greatest prophet, so there are some who place John above Jesus.